Closing

Ever notice that as the fight progresses, you can't tell which one is
which?
I don't think that group moderation is such a bad idea, although
self-moderation would certainly be better. Set up some fair ground
rules for debate and zap messages that don't comply. After a couple
days people will figure it out. Let the battles rage on alt.forestry:
that's what it's for.
Joseph Zorzin wrote:
>> Don Staples wrote:
> >
>> > I agree, we children need to stop argueing and get back onsubject.
> > --
>> A certain amount of arguing isn't bad. But after 20-30 messages when
> each side has dug itself in- then it's time to move on.
>> And as I've said many times here, if more of the so called "leadership"
> of this profession got involved with these discussions, then we'd have
> more sides to the debate, some conclusions could be drawn... and the
> "leaders" might learn something- talking to mud foresters and
> photographers instead of their flunkies and pinhead politicians. But
> since they don't know anything in my opinion, they'd embarrass
> themselves, so they stay away from this Roman Forum.
>> --
> -----------------------------------
>http://forestmeister.com> "Still, after a year, the only forestry web page in the otherwise
> sophisticated state of Massachusetts"
>> "In wilderness is the preservation of the world."
> Henry David Thoreau